Massive "Panama Papers" leak released

[Picaro]

And, of course, not a single one of those links has anything at all to do with the Panama Papers.
All you can do is deflect with more wild speculation backed by only rumor and gossip.

I never said they did, I said they launder money overseas. Try working on your reading skills, then admit you are wrong and making bullshit claims that 'there is no evidence the Clintons engage in off-shoring money'. None of it is 'wild speculation', except in the minds of ignorant partisans like yourself.

 

[Picaro]

Such a load of swill. The profits held overseas have already been taxed in the local jurisdictions. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world to double tax foreign profits...I think Zimbabwe is the other hold that still does such double taxation.

Wrong as usual; Google 'foreign tax credits', and also Google tax codes for any jurisdiction you care to name. This is a dumb as the 'taxing dividends is double taxation' bullshit myth peddled a while back.

You have your head up your anal orifice, as usual.

When a U.S. corporation repatriates foreign profits (cash) into the U.S., they are taxed again...even if they have already paid foreign taxes.

Posting more gibberish doesn't make you look any smarter, just dumber.

And yet you keep doing it over and over and over again...and proving Einstein correct.

You keep quoting me, so who fits Einstein's observation, again? Just admit your attempt at spin was amateurish and wrong, as you usually are.

 

[boedicca]

Such a load of swill. The profits held overseas have already been taxed in the local jurisdictions. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world to double tax foreign profits...I think Zimbabwe is the other hold that still does such double taxation.

Wrong as usual; Google 'foreign tax credits', and also Google tax codes for any jurisdiction you care to name. This is a dumb as the 'taxing dividends is double taxation' bullshit myth peddled a while back.

You have your head up your anal orifice, as usual.

When a U.S. corporation repatriates foreign profits (cash) into the U.S., they are taxed again...even if they have already paid foreign taxes.

Posting more gibberish doesn't make you look any smarter, just dumber.

And yet you keep doing it over and over and over again...and proving Einstein correct.

You keep quoting me, so who fits Einstein's observation, again? Just admit your attempt at spin was amateurish and wrong, as you usually are.

Here's a little story about that: No.

And too bad so sad that you are as ignorant regarding corporate taxes as you are about pretty much everything you attempt to discuss.

 

[georgephillip]

Such a load of swill. The profits held overseas have already been taxed in the local jurisdictions. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world to double tax foreign profits...I think Zimbabwe is the other hold that still does such double taxation.

Of course.
The rich need more.

Don't they?

 

[edthecynic]

And, of course, not a single one of those links has anything at all to do with the Panama Papers.
All you can do is deflect with more wild speculation backed by only rumor and gossip.

I never said they did, I said they launder money overseas. Try working on your reading skills, then admit you are wrong and making bullshit claims that 'there is no evidence the Clintons engage in off-shoring money'. None of it is 'wild speculation', except in the minds of ignorant partisans like yourself.

Every one of those OPINION pieces are based on nothing but GOSSIP, and you know it.
If there was even the SLIGHTEST evidence of money laundering by the Clintons, the GOP would be pursuing that rather than all their phony fishing expeditions thus far.

 

[georgephillip]

One can also Google Glencore and find out how moving profits from lowballing goods produced in one country can be laundered through dummy companies a

Would you be referring to this Glencore?
"According to an Australian Public Radio report, 'Glencore's history reads like a spy novel'.[13]

"The company was founded as Marc Rich & Co. AG in 1974 by billionaire commodity trader Marc Rich, who was charged with tax evasion and illegal business dealings with Iran in the US, but pardoned by President Bill Clinton in 2001.[14]

"He was never brought before US courts before his pardoning, therefore there was never a verdict on these charges."
Glencore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[boedicca]

Such a load of swill. The profits held overseas have already been taxed in the local jurisdictions. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world to double tax foreign profits...I think Zimbabwe is the other hold that still does such double taxation.

Of course.
The rich need more.

Don't they?

Silly man. Corporations don't pay taxes - their customers and employees, as well as shareholders do.

 

[edthecynic]

Silly man. Corporations don't pay taxes - their customers and employees, as well as shareholders do.[/QUOTE]
If that were then they have no reason for offshoring their profits!

Also if that were true then all you would have to do to create a consumption/fair tax is convert all taxes to corporate taxes, but the fair taxers vehemently oppose that. Why do you think that is?????

 

[boedicca]

Silly man. Corporations don't pay taxes - their customers and employees, as well as shareholders do.

If that were then they have no reason for offshoring their profits!

Also if that were true then all you would have to do to create a consumption/fair tax is convert all taxes to corporate taxes, but the fair taxers vehemently oppose that. Why do you think that is?????[/QUOTE]

Talk about a Non Sequitur. Profits held over seas are CASH. Repatriating profits which are then taxes results in higher prices for customers.

 

[Political Junky]

Such a load of swill. The profits held overseas have already been taxed in the local jurisdictions. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world to double tax foreign profits...I think Zimbabwe is the other hold that still does such double taxation.

Of course.
The rich need more.

Don't they?

Silly man. Corporations don't pay taxes - their customers and employees, as well as shareholders do.

True, many corporations don't pay, but they should. Your point, protecting corporations, is dumb, but often repeated by the Right. It's amazing that even poor folks are so protective of corporations.

 

[georgephillip]

Silly man. Corporations don't pay taxes - their customers and employees, as well as shareholders do.

Shareholders need to pay more.
"The companies profiled here represent a range of segments of the U.S. economy:

• Broadcaster CBS Corporation enjoyed $1.8 billion in U.S. profits last year, and received a federal income tax rebate of $235 million.
• Doll-maker Mattel, which has paid zero federal income taxes over the past five years, received a tax rebate of $46 million in 2014.
• The financial services corporation Prudential avoided all federal income taxes on its $3.5 billion in U.S. profits in 2014.
• Ryder System, which provides truck rentals and services, paid a negative 0.3 percent federal income tax rate in 2014 and over the past five years a negative 0.5 percent rate.
• California-based utility PG&E had negative tax rates both in 2014 and over the five-year period."

Fifteen (of Many) Reasons Why We Need Corporate Tax Reform | CTJReports

 

[frigidweirdo]

There are no secrets any more. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

Yeah, we should be able to hide our illegal activity.

We should be able to keep legal activity private.

How private?

If you have money and you're moving it around, should that be private? Seems the only ones who want it private are the ones doing illegal stuff with it.

 

[my2¢]

I know this should be a big deal. But it really hasn't peaked my interest. I thought it would when I first saw the glaring headlines days ago. It doesn't help that of what I did read and hear a good part of it was the media patting itself on the back over the operation. Heard about protests in Iceland, otherwise reaction around the world seems to be a similar big yawn. But then again I haven't been paying attention and nobody I know seems to be talking about it.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

There are no secrets any more. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

Yeah, we should be able to hide our illegal activity.

We should be able to keep legal activity private.

How private?

If you have money and you're moving it around, should that be private? Seems the only ones who want it private are the ones doing illegal stuff with it.

Of course legal transactions should be private. It's none of your business what I do with my money and as long as it's legal, it's none of the government's business, either.

 

[frigidweirdo]

There are no secrets any more. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

Yeah, we should be able to hide our illegal activity.

We should be able to keep legal activity private.

How private?

If you have money and you're moving it around, should that be private? Seems the only ones who want it private are the ones doing illegal stuff with it.

Of course legal transactions should be private. It's none of your business what I do with my money and as long as it's legal, it's none of the government's business, either.

How does anyone know if it's legal if it's private?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Its getting worse for Cameron.Dodgy Dave has been caught out trying to protect the secrecy around these trusts.
PM Intervened To Weaken EU Action On Trusts
No interest was declared by Dave at all.

 

[georgephillip]

Its getting worse for Cameron.Dodgy Dave has been caught out trying to protect the secrecy around these trusts.
PM Intervened To Weaken EU Action On Trusts
No interest was declared by Dave at all.

Dodgy Dave?
"Among the leaked documents from Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca are details of a multimillion-pound offshore firm set up by Mr Cameron's father Ian in the tax haven.
PM Intervened To Weaken EU Action On Trusts
"Since details of the fund emerged, Downing Street has issued four separate statements on the PM's personal finances - eventually clarifying that Mr Cameron, his wife and their children will not benefit from offshore funds or trusts in the future."
Fortunately, US elites don't have to bother with Panama since Wyoming is much closer.
Why Wyoming has star turn in the Panama Papers

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

There are no secrets any more. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

Yeah, we should be able to hide our illegal activity.

We should be able to keep legal activity private.

How private?

If you have money and you're moving it around, should that be private? Seems the only ones who want it private are the ones doing illegal stuff with it.

Of course legal transactions should be private. It's none of your business what I do with my money and as long as it's legal, it's none of the government's business, either.

How does anyone know if it's legal if it's private?

Just, wow!...lol

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, we should be able to hide our illegal activity.

We should be able to keep legal activity private.

How private?

If you have money and you're moving it around, should that be private? Seems the only ones who want it private are the ones doing illegal stuff with it.

Of course legal transactions should be private. It's none of your business what I do with my money and as long as it's legal, it's none of the government's business, either.

How does anyone know if it's legal if it's private?

Just, wow!...lol

Would have been better had you answered the question.

 

[Picaro]

The report was very preliminary. It was surprising that no Americans would be implicated. An enormous amount of capital is involved.

Americans have more options and closer places to hide theirs.